Should Scripture and Science by Compatible

“This program looks at the details of what God did on the sixth day of creation. As we do, we’ll look at both the biblical account and science related to these topics. We’ll discover many of these fine-tuning details that highlight God’s creation power and design of the universe. We’ll see that God’s creation of people in His image reveals deep level of love that endures still
today.”

today on the Jan Ekberg show, we will provide answers for those who have abandoned their Christian faith because of science. Somewhere along the line you were persuaded that the biblical account of creation cannot be reconciled with modern science today. But in this series, we will argue that the latest scientific evidence will actually lead you to believe it. God for again, we will answer the question. Should we expect to find agreement between the record of nature and the record of Scripture? Sure, we should, because it’s the same author. I mean, you look at a building that was done by an architect. Another billion by same architect. You say it’s a Frank Lloyd Wright building. You look at the universe. It was built by God. It’s got all over not made in USA, but made by the living God. And you look at the Scriptures. That, too, came from God. Now the author is the same interpreters Burke on both the interpreters may disagree, but not the evidence that the road dad itself the raw data itself, comes from the same or otherwise we throw away the doctrine of creation. Otherwise, we throw away the inspiration that full inert Where have got we came through away either. They both come from the living god. My guest today is astronomer Dr Hugh Ross, who received his PhD in astronomy from the University of Toronto and did postdoctoral research at Caltech on quasars. He is the author of many books, including his latest Navigating Genesis. We will also hear from Hebrew scholar Dr Walter Keyser, a man thought by many to be one of the world’s most knowledgeable authorities on the Old Testament in Hebrew language. Join us and hear how the latest scientific evidence is in agreement with the biblical account of creation in Genesis one in two. On this special edition of the Jan Ekberg show, or of our programme, we’ve got another great one free. Today. My guest is astronomer astrophysicist actor Hugh Ross and let me start by asking all of us a question, and that is, should we expect to find comparability between science and the Bible? What do you think? First of all, the Bible has to say about their question. What does God say in the Bible? And then what do folks like you that are astronomers? Astrophysicists. What did they expect What does he know now? And I want to start this very fascinating topic today with a clip from one of the world’s leading even Joeckel Hebrew scholars, Dr Walter Keyser. And I’ve had Dr Kaiser and Hugh together on some programmes. We’ve also had them in debates, and this question has come up repeatedly. And so I want to start with the question I asked him and then his answer. It’s a short one, so listen very carefully. Watch this. Let me ask both of you. The fact is, when you take the text, okay and you take science, is it wrong to try to see that we have comparability? Should we have compatibility, Walter? Sure, we should, because it’s the same author. I mean, you look at a building that was done by an architect in another building by same architect. You say it’s a Frank Lloyd Wright building. You look at the universe. It was built by God. It’s got all over not made in USA, but made by the living God. And you look at the scriptures. That too, came from God. Now the author is the same. Interpreters work on both. The interpreters might disagree but not the evidence, not the road dad itself, the raw that itself comes from the same Lord. Otherwise, we throw away the doctor and creation. Otherwise, we throw away the inspiration that full inherit where have got we can’t throw away either. They both come from the living god here. I just enjoy listening to to Walter talk about these things, and I want to ask you is an astronomer astrophysicist. Do you agree? Totally. I mean, God gave us the Book of nature. He gave us a book of Scripture. You see that in the Belgian confession that God gave us two books to reveal himself, and I agree with Wall to that science is man’s attempt to interpret the record of nature. Theology is man’s attempt to interpret the Book of Scripture, and because of human interpretation, they could disagree. But there’s no disagreement between the Book of Scripture and the book in nature because they came from the same God and we look at our science and theology where they do disagree. That will give us a pathway whereby we can discover more truth that we don’t already know have in our possession. We in the last few programmes have been trying to show them that they are comparable and that in fact the first chapter of Genesis in simple words for all generations has put complex ideas and thoughts that you have found is astronomers and astrophysicists has been true. And yet there is one that seems to come up in different places among sceptics. And that’s what happened on the fourth day when the Bible says this and God said, Let there be light in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night and let them service signs to mark sacred times in days and years and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth. And it was so in God made two great lights, the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth to govern the day and the night and two separate life from darkness in God saw that it was good and there was evening and there was morning the fourth day. Now scientifically, it seems like we would have a problem if it took 45 days to get to the spot where in the universe and around our earth, we are now dropping in the sun, moon and stars. How do you interpret those? Well, John, you’re citing the passage That’s most quoted by sceptics for discounting the Bible’s God’s word. They just say this is utter scientific nonsense. How can you have the sun coming after the plants? Plants can survive though the heat in light of the sun. Theo Earth can’t be stable in orbit now without the gravity of the sun. And they say the Bible’s got that wrong in the first chapter, then why trust any of it? But it was Galileo who said, The biggest mistake you can make him Bible interpretation is to get the wrong point of view. And this is where Genesis is crystal clear. Genesis 11, speaking about the universe. But Genesis one to a changes the frame of reference from the universe to the surface of the earth. So we’re to understand the account of the six days from that perspective. So it’s God looking up at the clouds from the surface of the earth. It is dark on the surface of the waters before the six days because the atmosphere will let the light pass through and job 37 to 39 parallels of six days. There is explicit and telling us it’s dark because God blanketed the seas with clouds. So creation day one god transforms the atmosphere will pay two friends Lucent on Creation Day four. God transforms the atmosphere from translucent that has permanently overcast toward the clouds break and, for the first time, creatures on the surface of the earth Conceit e the sun, moon and stars in the sky, which God had created before the six days. Therefore, there is no conflict between what Genesis one teachers and what the established scientific record declares. You know, it’s just astonishing to me that we have this information in Genesis, and yet so many Christians and non Christians do not know what the real scoop is. You have been invited to conferences where you’ve had 700 professors were 700 folks that are absolutely agnostic or sceptical in their approach to Genesis one, and you’ve been asked to speak and you were telling me between the break here of of what some of the comments are when they understand what God is saying in this passage, what’s happened in some of these conferences. But what happens when I speak to an audience say of several 100 atheists is like we’ve never heard these evidences before. We never heard this interpretation of Genesis before, and when I’m realising, is that Christians simply haven’t been equipped to give the best evidence is for their faith and in many respects is not an argument against God. Atheists was simply arguing against our tactics and trying to present our Christian faith. But I can tell you we had a dramatic response, particularly that invented Cal Tech. People came up to me afterwards and said, We’ve never heard this kind of response before. We’ve never seen this kind of grace in a debate before, and you’ve given us a lot to think about. The most common coming I got is I’m no longer secure in my atheism. Yeah, let’s take an emotional one that’s on the Christian side of the tracks. For those that want the days to be a shorter period of time, they take the objection and they say was deaf in evidence in the animal world and from all appearances of a fossil record, it seems like there was a lot of death in the animal world before man ever showed up. No matter how you gauge when he showed up was death and evidence in the animal world before Adam sinned. Or did all those animals die after he said? And could on Lee die after, he said, How do you answer that? Well, it typically comes from Miss Understanding of Roman Spy. 12 were claims that death cane through Adam’s sin. But if you read the entire verse, it says, Get through. Sin was visited upon all men. We’re the only species that experiences scent. Dogs and cats don’t send the cows, don’t send cockroaches. Don’t send on Lee we humans. And that’s his death came to all men. That text does not say all life. It says all men. So Adam’s offence in the Garden of Eden brought death to the entire human species, physical death and spiritually death. But notice the text very carefully avoids mentioning the plants and the animals. Likewise, first Corinthians 15, which addresses the same subject, is very clear that this is referring to humans on Lee and, after all, were the beneficiaries of the death of plants and animals have proceeded us. That’s where we get coal, oil, natural gas. That’s re gift. Limestone. You’d have to answer the question. Where did all these bio deposits come from? Exactly? In the violin, deposits are enormous and they weren’t enormous. We wouldn’t be able to launch and sustain global high technology civilisation. And the the bio master is there. The fact is, it took a while to get there. How long would it take to get there? Well, at a minimum, there’s 76 quadrillion tonnes of bile deposits in the crust of the Earth that requires even with 100% energy efficient capture of solar energy, you’re talking many millions of years to accumulate that much bio deposits. So what is the objection? What is the problem? What is the emotional attachment to not having the animals die before Adam sent? Well, I think it’s because we humans emotionally attached or bond with these animals so strongly and we feel the recognises job points out, God gave us these animals to teach us things about ourselves. and about God as these animals were designed to bond to us. We were designed to bond to God as our sin in our abuse causes animals to run away from us and said it towards us. Our sin and abuse causes us human beings to run away from God instead of towards him as they were created to serve him. Please us. We were created to serve and please God and the reason why God gave this strong emotional bonding capacity between humans and the solid animals. And so we would understand the relationship God wants it wants to have with us. Some people say it’s a prom of theocracy. That is that How could you have God in the Genesis One and two records saying. And when he got done, creating the plants and animals in different things in the creation days, God said this was good. How can it be good to have animals dying, scavenging, fighting etcetera? Well, repeatedly, Genesis one says, What God created is good, and it closes with God saying it is very good. But what’s unique about Christianity? It’s a two creation model. God creates This universe is a tool in God’s hand to eliminate evil and suffering, while the same time releasing human free will to be even more expressive. And once evil and suffering of Concord and gone, then God ushers willing human beings into the new creation for evil and suffering will never exist again. So it’s a very good creation, I would argue, the perfect creation for God to eliminate evil and suffering once and for all. But it’s not the ultimate creation. And part of the question that relates to all of this has to do with if animals die before Adam sinned. Does this somehow effect what Jesus Christ did on the cross and paying for the sins of the world? Does this somehow affect theatre own mint? And I asked Dr Walter Keyser, one of the leading, even juggle Hebrew scholars, to tackle this question in a previous programme, and I’d like you to watch this clip run. It we’re talking about was very death in the world before Adam send ordered Adamson bring death not only demand, but to the plant and animal world as well. And we’re not talking about an interesting sidebar on that. That is some folks who hold to a literal 24 hour day claimed that if you hold to the fact that there was a death in the world before, Adam sinned that this somehow fix the atonement and they say you know he was 9 22 says. In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness. Now, Hugh, can you explain to me why these folks hold that if on animal died before the fall or any time, even after that, this effects what Jesus did in terms of redemption for us or anything that Moses said in the Old Testament? Well, they’re expanding on the intent of the Hebrews nine and 10. I mean, does talk about how your redemption is through the shedding of blood, but now they’re trying to claim that all shed blood somehow ties into atonement. Yeah, but it’s there’s no revisionist in without the shedding of Christ blood. Exactly. That initially files that all shed blood is for the remission of doesn’t follow that the deer goes through a thicket and scrapes that skin and little bit of blood comes out that that somehow ties into atonement. going to jump in here on this one. Yeah, This is a strange argument because I just don’t see the relevance in context. Hebrews, nine and 10, is trying to make the point of the high priesthood of Christ and his death for those many women who suffered spiritually death and then physical death, who are made in his image. And his point was that the blood of bulls and goats couldn’t take away saying That’s in Hebrews 10 to 3 and four. And neither did the Old Testament ever claim that it did. The point was simply that on Lee on the word of God was seen taking away Neil Testament. And there was a picture of life for life. A substituted life of an animal. But an animal is not immortal. And this animal, it couldn’t be. It had to be repeated over and over, over and over. Get But Christ, when he came, he suffered a pot once for all. And he gave his blood. We don’t think of blood is a transfusion of importation of life. This blood was blood spilled out on the ground. So blood here is equal to death. Sacrifice substitution vie carries substitution. And so his argument was that it was only by the giving up of his life, his life, blood as a substitute for men and women. Could they have a life eternal? But I don’t think you can extend that and say You want todo have salvation for zebras, for elephants, tigers and that they need to have bloodshed. It’s zits. Ah, backwards argument. I’m no verse numbers. I don’t see the verse word. If there is a verse, it says that the animals can be saved, just like many women came through the shedding of blood. Then I withdraw all of my objections. But until I find that verse, I’m hamstrung, aren’t you? And listening to this for some folks, this is the whole ball game, and they tie it to the Scripture and they tie it to the way they feel about the animals. Clear up both of those sides of the tracks give us further information from what Dr Kaiser has already said. Well, what we can add to Kaiser’s comments is that Adam was not the first centre. Satan was the first one to sin. We can also add that God knew that sin would come before he created universe. You got a verse and Timothy A. Says the grace of God that we now experience was put into effect before the beginning of time. So before God created Universe, he knew that his grace would be necessary. He anticipated sin, and he designed the universe in advance with sin in mind and so on. Adam’s sin it’s his cursed is the ground because of you. God didn’t change the physics of the universe, he says. The ground will not produce like it did before. Because you’re going to abuse the ground. You’re going to abuse animals and plants. That’s why won’t be productive seven times, it tells us in the Bible the laws of physics don’t change from the moment of creation until God permanently conquers and removes evil. Do you see a problem with word good in relationship to the pain and suffering of animals? Before Adam sent a lot at all? Because God promises a much better creation is going to replace this creation. God’s not going to bring us back to the Garden of Eden. God’s got something far better than paradise in mind for those people who choose to spend eternity with him. Yeah. What is the gospel, in a nutshell for people that have been listening to the scientific evidence for creation. Well, you know, we were in the Garden of Eden. We were without sin. We chose to rebel against our creator. But God had him plan already and means by which he could deliver fallen humanity into a state where they would never rebel against him again. And yet their free will be in hits. Keep in mind, the laws of physics are restraining the expression of our free will. God wants us to be able to express farm or love than we can in this creation. But evil has to be conquered first and was through his own son coming to worth and sacrificing himself in the cross that we have the means if we so choose to receive the perfection we can’t get by our own human effort. Folks, I hope that you’re listening to all this and you’ll think about this in terms of what God is saying to us. And your faith will be strengthened as you think about all of the information in this record of science as well as in the Bible itself and how these come perfectly together. Now I want to say thank you to Hugh for being with us and all of these programmes. And your humility in your knowledge is astonishing to watch. And I’m sure that we have all learned a tonne of information here. Thank you for coming and being with us and folks, I want you to stay tuned so you can hear how you can get all the information that we have done. All of these eight programmes listen, stay tuned for scenes from next week’s programme. Well, thanks for being with me today. If you enjoyed today’s programme, I would like to watch it again or wish to do some of our other programmes and topics. Just go to our free Johnny Coburg. Show em well, You may watch our programmes at our website at j show dot war Today Siri’s is entitled Step by step through creation. In these four programmes, astronomer and astrophysicist Dr Hugh Ross and I will take you first fibres through Genesis One and two and show you how the biblical account of creation can be reconciled with scientific evidence today. Then we also take the second series with Dr Ross and titled Science Discovers the Universe had a beginning. In this series, he answers the questions. What scientific evidence has led astronomers to conclude the universe had a beginning? Just is the Bible Selves whatever in shows that God meticulously created and designed the universe that human life can live on Earth, How is God position Jupiter, Saturn and Neptune to protect the Earth? And how did God exquisitely designed the sun, the Moon and stars for man’s benefit? Again, you may watch any of these episodes free on Jan Ekberg show App or You made download each episode for only $5 an episode on our website at j show dot folks. Our goal is to help encourage on strengthen you in your walk with the Lord. And possibly God is speaking to you today. I would like to know how to become a Christian, or you would like to prey on invite Jesus Christ to be your personal Saviour. If so, just go to our website right now. Click on Frey to accept Jesus as your Saviour. Good bye. God bless you. I’ll see you next week. Let’s talk a bit about if you were to hold two the young earth point of view that it seems that the rate of evolution of the animals coming out of the Ark where we’re at right now is faster paced than the evolutionists themselves. Hold talk about that for a little faster by factors of thousands and sometimes millions of times what atheist evolutionists would hold as because of their belief that there was no death until Adam sent. And therefore they would argue there were no carnivores until Adam appeared upon the scene. And so, in their theology, you have herbivores evolving into carnivores very quickly after the fall of Adam. And also they believe the flood of Noah was not just worldwide to humanity, but global and extent, and therefore the few 1000 species of life on board. The Ark would need to wrap up the ball to become the millions of land willing species we have today, and a number of atheistic evolutions of commented that these young earth creations believe in Darwinian evolution to a degree far greater than they have ever dreamed of, literally by thousands of times. Yeah, they all do the they do the evolutionist evolutionist don’t believe that they don’t believe that. But it also explains why there is so insistent that the Earth must be young. Given that they believe that biological evolution operates that extremely efficient level. The only way they can sustain their creation doctrine is to limit the time scale. To just thousands of years. We’ve done two whole Siri’s you and I, where we have actually invited folks who are astronomers to present the scientific case for the young Earth position. And I think it would be correct to say that there was no really scientific evidence presented. Would you characterise it that way? Well, the value that TV debate that we did John was that we had a panel of 13 evangelical astronomers evaluated. I was pleased because it really emulated this spirit of Axe 15, where we had the Jerusalem council evaluated debate about circumcision. Was it necessary for salvation? It was those 13 astronomers that pointed out that the younger side basically was pointing out what we don’t yet understand in astronomy, didn’t present any evidence astronomically for a young earth position, but simply made the point that we old Earth astronomers don’t understand everything about the universe. Well, it’s going to be that way always. I don’t understand everything about my wife, but I’m prepared to be married to her. Unfortunately, every year I stay married to her. I learned Mawr, and that’s the thing that I think, these thes panel of astronomers pointed out. We’re learning Maura and more with every year that goes by as we learn Mawr Mawr the evidence becomes even more progressively compelling that the universe, indeed is not thousands of years old but billions of years old. Possibly not speaking to you today, you would like to have someone pray with you or you have a question you would like to ask. There’s a phone number on your screen right now that you may call, Call that number. Someone will be happy to pray with you. Thank you for joining me today. I hope that you’ll join me again at the same time next week, next week on The Johnny Coburg Show since 2001 job in dealing with pain and different degenerative disease issues, and had had one surgery and then a second one in 2008, and that was the defining time that you have to change your life I had a great doctor in Illinois and he said, Doctor, easily, you’ve got to change your life or you’re going to be in a bad way to learn how to start a relationship with Jesus Christ, go to our website.